December 22, 2005

Time for a good old fashioned fisking

Hooray! I know you're all overjoyed I'm going to revisit this tired subject again. But after reading this article, I just can't let it go. I'm sorry. I can't let this one slide.

I first read that piece, "Damon defection talk of town", last night, and immediately my vision was overwhelmed with a terrible blinding red...I could feel my skin begin to smolder...for a while there, it was touch and go whether or not I was going to spontaneously combust.

I don't really know who I'm mad at, exactly--the MLB reporter for their lazy roundup piece encompassing only the low-hanging fruit? Or the people they quote in the article as "representative" of Sox fans, or even prevailing opinion in Boston, for misrepresenting it so terribly?

Probably both.

This piece just struck home for me just how divorced my reality has become from the Boston sports media's reality in my year or so of abstention from WEEI and the Globe sports page. The longer I avoid it, the more alien its content becomes.

First there's Glenn Ordway's quote:

"I think they were calling [George] Steinbrenner's bluff," said Glenn Ordway, host of the "Big Show" on WEEI. "They did not believe that the Yankees were going to come in and pay more money for him.

Later, he added: "It was a card game. It was a poker match and they thought the Yankees were bluffing them."

How does he know this? I didn't listen to the show, so I don't know if he cited any sources. But let's think about Glenn Ordway for a second. Do you think he has credible sources backing up his view of how the negotiations went? Or do you think he's just taking the most hysterical viewpoint possible in order to stir up callers to his show?

By the way, the callers quoted in this piece are less than credible, since everyone knows after listening to Ordway for a week that if you don't agree with everything he says, and call up and say so, you're going to get shouted down. Period. The Big O show is an echo chamber akin to Rush Limbaugh or Howard Stern. It does not represent reality.

Ordway was joined by Tony Massarotti of the Boston Herald.

"Now, to replace him, you have to start creating holes in other places," said Massarotti. "Now, they're going to have to overpay. Teams know they have the Red Sox over a barrel."

Wow. My blood pressure just zoomed into the red zone reading that again, even though I knew it was coming this time. I really can hardly stand it. I mean...it's bullshit. It's just bullshit. Apparently we've never lost a free agent before? Apparently there's never been a hole to fill in the off-season before? I'd like to see just how many other MLB teams "know" they have the Red Sox, with their $130 million payroll, playoffs three years in a row, among the largest sports markets in the United States, and recent World Series championship, "over a barrel."

Get real.

This is not...repeat...not how most of the Sox fans I speak with now on a regular basis remotely feel. I doubt Massarotti's take has ever even crossed their minds (and let's not forget it was Massarotti that defended Grady Little before the dust had even cleared on Game 7). And yet he, along with Ordway, is being held up as representative. Nice.

Now, of course, for the piece de resistance, every national pundit's favorite Boston media "representative", Dan Shaughnessy.

"So now your Boston Red Sox have no center fielder, no shortstop, and no first baseman, to go along with no Theo Epstein and no clue," he wrote.

He also wrote: "The Red Sox won't recover from this one easily. In an already dismal offseason, they've now lost their center fielder and their leadoff hitter. They've also lost a local icon, a rare favorite of teenage girls and fanboy bloggers."

Okay. I thought I disliked the CHB before, but this...this takes it to a whole new level. Rockets it up into the stratosphere, in fact. My disgust for Dan Shaughnessy, with this quote alone, has officially entered a space normally reserved for Ann Coulter.

Let me count the ways:

The "No Theo and no clue" comment...do I really need to go into how richly ironic that is? Considering Shaughnessy is widely assigned a large portion of the credit for Theo's departure?

Having no CF, SS or 1B as of December 21 constitutes a "dismal" off-season? You know what, I think I'll refrain from storming Yawkey Way until they go into spring training with these positions unfilled--you know, about three months from now. What a maroon.

"The Red Sox won't recover from this easily"--Dan, like Ordway, apparently has a crystal ball. I must've left mine at home, but really, I think they very well could recover from it easily, by trading for Jeremy Reed, moving Pedroia to shortstop, and either plugging David Ortiz in at 1B for the time being or signing another utility player like Mientkiewicz. Regardless of what the moves are, THEY HAVE SEVERAL MORE MONTHS TO DO IT.

But it's this statement that really makes me feel as though I've swallowed a live chicken: "They've also lost a local icon, a rare favorite of teenage girls and fanboy bloggers." What a totally unecessary shot, first of all, at fans, something Dan Shaughnessy loves to do (remember his "no way to really insult Red Sox fans" during Mannygate). But what really puts a frosting of joy on this shit-cake of a sentence is, like the "no Theo" comment, the rich aura of irony. A very plausible translation (or further subordinate clause, if you will) might be "They've also lost a local icon, a rare favorite I haven't managed to find a way to destroy."

And yet, here in this MLB piece, Dan Shaughnessy, along with Ordway and Massarotti, are being held up as representative, once again, of the talk of the town in Boston.

Providence Journal sports editor Art Martone wrote, "Clearly irritated by the Sox' failure to offer him the contract he felt he deserved, Damon late last night reached preliminary agreement with the Yankees

This, too, though less irritatingly phrased, is a thread of conversation I've found disingenuous and aggravating. Johnny Damon defecting for more money is seen as a Sox failure? How do you figure? Like Pedro, they offered him what they could pay. He was greedier than that, and went elsewhere for more of the folding green. This is the first time this has ever happened in baseball, apparently. It surely is a singular failure on the part of the Sox brass that allowed this unprecedented debacle to take place.

But here's the most glaring, intelligence-insulting statement yet:

On television, Ch. 7, the local NBC affiliate, had one fan calling Damon a "traitor" and another one saying "He sold out." The station also had a report from New York, where Yankees fans were thrilled.

I'm sure there may be Yankees fans who are thrilled...but they're just not among the ones I've read / talked to, I guess. Like, for example, Jay Jaffe:

I'm pissed at the Damon signing, four years and $52 million, because it's back to business as usual for the Yanks. Damon is a 32-year-old centerfielder, A-list celebrity and Scott Boras client who was seeking a ridiculous seven-year deal that nobody was going to give him. Obviously, the Yanks called his bluff, going far beyond the Red Sox most recent four-year, $40 million offer, one the Sox never got the opportunity to match. So much for loyalty or Damon's words from last May...So now Damon will be handsomely overpaid to deteriorate right before our very eyes in Yankee Stadium. If you liked watching the decline and fall of Bernie Williams, get ready for more, because he's already as bad a thrower as Williams about five years ahead of schedule. In fact, per BP's numbers, he was at -5 runs last year, while the Yankee CFs, including Williams, were at -1. Yeesh.

Or, as referenced yesterday, YF of Yanksfan vs. Soxfan, and most of his commenters.

But, see, Red Sox fans being miserable and Yankees fans being thrilled is what some of these guys want to report, and from this piece it looks like they're going to--their minds are made up, so please don't confuse them with facts.

And finally...here, buried in the second to last graf of the story, is the following sentence:

On WEEI, some fans -- and one of the earlier hosts -- tried to put a positive spin on losing Damon.

Those words--"tried to"--it's amazing how two little words can change the entire slant of the statement, can't they?

Comments

In a world of constant change, it's good to know that some things stay the same: Dan Shaugnessy is still a fuckwit.

And if we needed a nice thought to warm our hearts over the holiday season, this one might do the trick:So now Damon will be handsomely overpaid to deteriorate right before our very eyes in Yankee Stadium. If you liked watching the decline and fall of Bernie Williams, get ready for more, because he's already as bad a thrower as Williams about five years ahead of schedule.

Somewhere in this entire post there *might* be a word or two that I don't 100% agree with, but probably not.

This does make me really wish Theo were still GM, because I don't think he would have signed Damon either, yet I have a hunch that a lot of this media stuff would read very differently if it were Theo not making the deal instead of B&J not making the deal.

dexter, i'm not sure how carefully you read this post or how well i succeeded in getting my point across, but my objection was not only the fact that ordway is speculating about what happened in the negotiations with no basis in fact (whether or not he's guessed right is obviously not something we can know for sure, either) but the fact that he and massarotti and shaughnessy are representing boston fans' opinions in the MLB.com piece. i disagree--vehemently--with many of the things they said, i think the idea that the sox got "punked" somehow on this deal is ludicrous, and i resent having these media guys famous for making mountains out of molehills and cashing in on controversy providing the most prominent quotes for the article published by MLB that was supposedly gauging "popular" opinion in boston.

in other words, i know what an opinion is. and you're missing my point.

You cannot just sign Jeremy Reed because he is not a free agent, so i think the Seattle Mariners do have your beloved Red Sox over a barrell for that option. (good luck with the Coco Crisp trade also)

And Marte cannot play SS because he is a third baseman. Wanna know why guys end up at third? because they have no range to play SS,2B or the outfield. Unless you move to that position so someone like Derek Jeter can remain at SS.

Get your facts straight. other than that it was nice seeing a Red Sox fan cry and rant on the world wide web.

good to see, also, that you "classy" yankees fans are still holding yourselves up as shining examples of intelligence and good behavior on the World Wide Web.

as a matter of fact, dickhead, i'm *not* crying about JD being gone. and i'm *not* crying, either, about the fact that the sox have three fucking months to sign three fucking players. which is exactly why i wrote this post to disagree with the mediots (and yankees fans desperate for the chance to gloat) who seem to think i *should* feel that way.

Two bits that stand out to me (other than, no shit Beth, you know where I stand on this one and it isn't in hysterical panic mode):

1. "teenage girls and fanboy bloggers". Because the girls are all 18 and under (I wonder what he would have thought of the creepy mom fans of Bellhorn) and airheadedly in love with Johnny's flowing locks, and the bloggers are male. Natch. Nitpicking, sure, but eh, that's how I roll.

2. Any sort of article citing WEEI as any sort of source, except to make fun of it, when everyone intelligent I know listens to it as a source of amusement at the hysteria.

"Like Pedro, they offered him what they could pay. He was greedier than that, and went elsewhere for more of the folding green. This is the first time this has ever happened in baseball, apparently. It surely is a singular failure on the part of the Sox brass that allowed this unprecedented debacle to take place."

I have to disagree with the notion that the Sox offered what they "could." Sox brass chose to offer an amount $12 million below the Yanks' offer and (if we are to believe Damon)$25 million below another offer. This is not to blame the management team, it's just a clarification: the Sox could have kept Damon. You say "what's 2.5 million a year for a baseball player?" I say "What's $2.5 million a year more for a sports franchise?" In this situation, I can't find fault with either player or management. Just one Yanks fan's opinion.

k, i think you're nitpicking now, but what i meant was, they offered him what they WANTED to pay him. of course they COULD have scraped together $12 million more. but they didn't want to. i still fail to see why this is a failure on the part of the sox. i don't get why they are supposed to have fucked up here. they made johnny damon a best offer, he wanted more money and so signed with the enemy. really, someone explain to me how the sox "failed" here. they "failed" to overpay him? they "failed" to offer an aging outfielder with a noodle arm a fifth, sixth or seventh year? they "failed" to bow to the demands of scott boras?

maybe i'm thick here, but i don't get it. it's the same with the pedro situation. pedro absolutely did not deserve, in my opinion, the contract with the sox he was demanding. no way would i sign him for as long as the mets did, either, not with that glass shoulder. so the mets went and made what i consider a foolish move--was that a sox "failure" also? personally i think it was smart.

i think the johnny damon thing will turn out to be the same way. unlike the CHB and ordway, here, i lack a crystal ball. but i still maintain that as long as the yankees continue overpaying free agents, they're not going to win out. period. i don't care how good they are--a-rod, after all, is supposed to be the best player since babe ruth, or whatever, right? have they won with him? negatory. or randy johnson. he was gonna put the yankees over the top last year, right? whoops. honestly, i don't buy the idea that johnny damon will be any more effective than those guys for the yankees. i think i'd feel that way even if i were a yankees fan, and many yankees fans do right now.

well, I didn't say it was a bad move by the sox. I was trying to point out that both sides acted reasonably, in other words, they acted in their own self-interest. You've chosen to put the onus on Damon. But I think it's unreasonable to expect a professional athlete to take a 30% lower offer. Schilling never did it with the Phils or the D-Backs. Call it greed if you will. I just don't know why it's not penny pinching on the part of the franchise.

As a yanks fan, I think the Damon move is positive, and, at least for the next two years, will set up the team as a ridiculously strong offensive club. We'll see.

I think you're half-right about the Yanks policy of overpaying for free agents. For instance, it's undeniable that the A-Rod trade was great for the Yanks. He is one of the two best players in baseball. Baseball Prospectus argues convincingly in Mind Game that had he been traded to the Sox, the team would have won 8 more games that year (this factors in Manny's departure, etc.)Also, the team pays 2/3 of the contract. $16 million is a good price for his services.

And while the Big Unit trade did not work out last year (although he was a dominant pitcher in the 2nd half), I thought it was a worthwhile risk. Afterall, the Big Unit is a freak of nature, one of the two best pitchers of the last 10 years.

The problem comes in the details for the Yanks. What's helped the Sox in relation to the Yanks the last couple of years is their ability to fill the roster with quality players who play small roles. A team with the Yanks resources should not have Womack, Crosby and Sierra as the three best players off the bench. That team also shouldn't have Flaherty as a back-up catcher (that's a dig by the way). Indeed, big signings play a part in this problem as they divert money away from developing a good bench and they force the team to lose high draft picks every year, these picks being players who could fill key roles (such as Hansen will with the Sox this year).

yeah, i put the onus on damon, because i am a red sox fan, and a key player on our championship team just sold his soul to the MFY. that tends to make a sox fan angry. and it was damon's decision, so i put the onus on him.

whether or not schilling did a similar thing, whatever, doesn't make me okay with the fact that johnny damon decided to play for the yankees. i'm not going to be HAPPY about it.

what i don't like or understand is all the "the red sox fucked up" stuff. so, yeah, i don't put the onus on them. maybe that's my own myopia as a fan of the team over players, but there you have it.

i think we can generally agree on the yankees FA issue, because whatever its actual result--an overpaid clump of all-stars with no actual sense of team or an inattention to the small details as you mention--it's not helping them, and the damon signing is more of the same.

Statcounter C2F

Copyright

WHAT THIS MEANS:
It means you can quote me or reproduce parts of my posts--the sharing of ideas are what the blogosphere is all about.
But it means YOU MUST ATTRIBUTE THE SOURCE. Say where you got the quote from. Say whose idea it was. Say who found the information. Give credit where credit is due.
Do NOT reproduce any of my posts as a whole. Do NOT reproduce any of my content for commercial gain. ESPECIALLY DO NOT PASS MY WORK OFF AS YOUR OWN. Plagiarists will be found, humiliated, and, where appropriate, prosecuted.
ALL CONTENT UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED IS SOLE PROPERTY OF THE SITE AUTHOR AND PROTECTED UNDER COPYRIGHT.

CONTACT

I'm happy to talk with you about exchanging links or advertising on this blog, but please don't use my site's comments section to explicitly promote your site or your business without getting in touch with me first.